From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,8dea6f46dfb95f66 X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: dewar@merv.cs.nyu.edu (Robert Dewar) Subject: Re: Standard libraries (Was: Environment variables) Date: 1996/11/14 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 196642600 references: <55819q$mql@newslink.runet.edu> <327A32A3.2DD0@itg-sepg.logicon.com> <1996Nov2.173625.1@eisner> <55kmb1$3m6@top.mitre.org> <56do9g$1v5@fozzie.sun3.iaf.nl> organization: New York University newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-11-14T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: Geert says "You could say the same of package Ada.Command_Line. The important point is, IMHO, that a reasonable number of different platforms (Dos, Unix, Windows, OS/2, Mac) which represent a significant share (90%?) of the potential Ada users have this same problem. That is a good enough reason to have some form of standard interface. I do not say that this functionality (including Ada.Command_Line) should be part of the standardized Ada language. Issues like these are very well suited to less formal standardizing, like including extra functionality in the GNAT standard libraries. These might perhaps be separated from the Ada.* hierarchy in an Extra.* hierarchy." Can you please explain why the approved IEEE POSIX-Ada binding, which has this functionality, as well as all the other functionality you go on to describe in your note, does not EXACTLY meet this requirement, in EXACTLY the manner that you recommend?